Ivermectin not effective in treating Covid-19, joint Mahidol-Oxford study shows

[simon43]

17 minutes ago, BE88 said:

Interesting, but where did you find this information?

 

If you ask Dr Google, there are several links to clinical trials involving this drug, but strangely no big press statements about its effectiveness from 'Big Pharma' ????

 

[ThailandRyan]

7 minutes ago, simon43 said:

Ignored by Big Pharma is a correct statement.  As you link, there have indeed been clinical trials and research which prove that this drug is very useful to kill/slow prostate cancer cell growth.  If this is the case, why isn't it being sold by Big Pharma for this very purpose? Perhaps it has something to do with the low OTC cost.....

How do you know its not in certain markets.

[xylophone]

1 hour ago, jaywalker2 said:

The saddest aspect of this fiasco is the demonization of Ivermectin which is probably the greatest wonder drug since penicillian. It has now villified as "dewormer" and only fit for animals.

Don't let the facts get in the way of truth/reality..........

 

Ivermectin is not shown to be effective against Covid-19 in clinical trials according to the findings of a joint University of Oxford and Mahidol University study.

 

The study that was published on the peer-reviewed eLife medical journal found that high doses of the drug ivermectin, controversially recommended by some high-profile political and media figures during the pandemic, is ineffective at treating the virus.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-ftx-ivermectin-together-trial-idUSL1N32I1H1

 

Fact Check-2015 Nobel Prize for ivermectin intended for treatment of parasitic infections doesn’t prove its efficacy on COVID-19

 

Correction Sep. 23, 2021: paragraph one has been corrected to clarify that the drug Ivermectin was not awarded the Nobel Prize. Rather, the prize was awarded to two scientists for their discoveries involving the drug.

 

AND as for the involvement of FTX surely not the same company....... FTX Trading Ltd., commonly known as FTX, is a bankrupt company that formerly operated a cryptocurrency exchange and crypto hedge fund.

Sam Bankman-Fried hit with four new criminal charges

 

 

[Danderman123]

25 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Don't let the facts get in the way of truth/reality..........

 

Ivermectin is not shown to be effective against Covid-19 in clinical trials according to the findings of a joint University of Oxford and Mahidol University study.

 

The study that was published on the peer-reviewed eLife medical journal found that high doses of the drug ivermectin, controversially recommended by some high-profile political and media figures during the pandemic, is ineffective at treating the virus.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-ftx-ivermectin-together-trial-idUSL1N32I1H1

 

Fact Check-2015 Nobel Prize for ivermectin intended for treatment of parasitic infections doesn’t prove its efficacy on COVID-19

 

Correction Sep. 23, 2021: paragraph one has been corrected to clarify that the drug Ivermectin was not awarded the Nobel Prize. Rather, the prize was awarded to two scientists for their discoveries involving the drug.

 

AND as for the involvement of FTX surely not the same company....... FTX Trading Ltd., commonly known as FTX, is a bankrupt company that formerly operated a cryptocurrency exchange and crypto hedge fund.

Sam Bankman-Fried hit with four new criminal charges

 

 

You are wasting your time focusing on one clinical trial, when there are dozens that show Ivermectin is not effective against Covid.

 

Since you are wasting our time criticizing one clinical trial, how about this:

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o917

 

"An analysis of 26 major trials of ivermectin for covid-19 found that over one third had “serious errors or signs of potential fraud.”7".

 

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/16/huge-study-supporting-ivermectin-as-covid-treatment-withdrawn-over-ethical-concerns

 

https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/9/2/ofab645/6509922

 

Ivermectin for COVID-19: Addressing Potential Bias and Medical Fraud 

[BritManToo]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

and yet, science is advanced by researchers questioning established knowledge. Funny how that works.

But the researchers questioning established knowledge aren't funded by governments or corporations.

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, simon43 said:

Ignored by Big Pharma is a correct statement.  As you link, there have indeed been clinical trials and research which prove that this drug is very useful to kill/slow prostate cancer cell growth.  If this is the case, why isn't it being sold by Big Pharma for this very purpose? Perhaps it has something to do with the low OTC cost.....

It is not the remit of big pharma to research pore-existing drugs that aren't theirs. That would be wasting money which could be used on the development of new drugs.

 

5 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

But the researchers questioning established knowledge aren't funded by governments or corporations.

Patently false. Governments and academic institutions fund research which constantly challenges past established research. Corporations too. How many times have we read that a drug is taken off the market or otherwise been restricted because of research. Many is the answer. Anti inflammatory drugs are but one example.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts trolling about possible treatments to slow cancer cell growth and kill prostate cancer cells have been removed as well as the replies. 

 

A post with an off topic and trolling video has been reported and removed.

[gamb00ler]

On 2/24/2023 at 10:28 AM, samuttodd said:

Um hmm,  worked for me without giving me a Heart attack or Myocarditits, or a stroke, or even an embolism. 

 

Did you conduct a randomized test by deliberately catching COVID multiple times and randomly choosing an identical looking placebo vs invermectin?  

[xylophone]

2 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Since you are wasting our time criticizing one clinical trial, how about this:

Strange post as I have posted many times about the myriad of clinical trials that prove ivermectin is ineffective for treating Covid, AND I was merely replying to a couple of instances by the poster, so "wasting our time" is an odd retort........can you read?

[eisfeld]

7 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Almost every important discovery was made by someone that didn't it in the corporate world.

IMHO corporate research drones don't add much knowledge of worth to the world.

Can you substantiate that somehow? To blanket dismiss all of corporate research as not adding much knowledge of worth to the world is an outrageous claim.

 

By the way, this study is not a corporate research study.

[eisfeld]

5 hours ago, jaywalker2 said:

As I mentioned, references to any source that is not linked to the government or the corporate media is not permitted on this forum. But there are several metaanalyses of the dozens of RCT's and observational studies on Ivermectin if you choose to make an effort. There is also an excellent webpage that provides real time data on all of the therapuetics being used to treat covid.

This is a lie. You can totally link to sources not linked to "the government" or "the corporate media". Go link to something from an academic source. It's typical for the conspiracy theorists to write "you can easily find it", "just google it", "there is a webpage", "suggest you look for" etc. No! Post the link.

 

5 hours ago, jaywalker2 said:

The Oxford-Mahidol study was published in elife. Ever heard of it? I didn't think so. 

Yes I've heard of it. What exactly are you trying to say? I've noticed you are trying to insinuate often but don't clearly spell it out.

 

5 hours ago, jaywalker2 said:

The Ivermectin study was launched at Oxford in 2021. The results, I believe, have been delayed at least twice. No indication of when they will finally be released

Favipiravir was added even before Ivermectin and that study is also not finished yet. Studies can take multiple years if done very thoroughly and under changing conditions (new strains all the time).

 

5 hours ago, jaywalker2 said:

The same thing happened with the Together trial. The release of the Ivermectin trial was delayed 8 months without explanation. When the results were finally released, the methodological lapses were so bad, over 100 doctors petitioned the New England Journal of Medicine to retract the study (which none of the major seemed to have reported on)

And now you can see why the people doing the Principle Trial are trying to be very careful in their work. There have been many trials, especially the ones showing Ivermectin in a positive light that had severe issues. They don't want to repeat that.

 

5 hours ago, jaywalker2 said:

I would have a lot more confidence in Oxford if after having pledged to donate the rights to its vaccine to drugmakers all over the world it actually sold exclusive rights to Astrazeneca in a deal brokered by the Gates Foundation. It receives enormous funding from big pharma and has a clear conflict of interest.

AstraZeneca sold the vaccine on a non-profit basis and worked with other manufacturers to produce and distribute it in their local region. The Gates Foundation said the claim that they urged Oxford to sign exclusive rights to AstraZeneca is not true. All they did was advise Oxford to team up with one of the big manufacturers to get the vaccine out asap and in big enough quantities.

 

Less than 2% of Oxfords funding came from private industry. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/apr/15/oxfordastrazeneca-covid-vaccine-research-was-97-publicly-funded

 

5 hours ago, jaywalker2 said:

To understand how absurd the situation is, Satoshi Omura, who won the Nobel Prize for his work on Ivermectin along with William Campbell, mentioned in a conversation on youtube that Ivermectin does have antiviral properties and he believed it was effective in treating Covid (which led the Japanese government toa approve the drug for covid treatment). The video was of course deleted by youtube for spreading misinformation.

What a shame, your sources have again been removed by the evil overlords! So I guess I need to take your word for it. On the other hand we have the word of William Campbell himself where he complains about people publishing fake information claiming he said Ivermectin was effective against Covid: https://drew.edu/stories/2021/09/09/drew-university-nobel-prize-winner-refutes-ivermectin-meme/

 

 

[zzaa09]

7 hours ago, simon43 said:

If you ask Dr Google, there are several links to clinical trials involving this drug, but strangely no big press statements about its effectiveness from 'Big Pharma' ????

 

Or the steadfast and mind numbing induced establishment circles.

Of three years time, there's a tonne of evidence/material that completely contradicts the repeated conventional narratives regarding everything COVID. 

 

Too many obsessive apologists and loyalists insist on ignoring such things, preferring to take the Kool-Aid that was offered some time ago - and sticking with it. 

[simon43]

31 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

Or the steadfast and mind numbing induced establishment circles.

Of three years time, there's a tonne of evidence/material that completely contradicts the repeated conventional narratives regarding everything COVID. 

 

Too many obsessive apologists and loyalists insist on ignoring such things, preferring to take the Kool-Aid that was offered some time ago - and sticking with it. 

Er.. re-read my comments. They only referred to Mebendazole for treating cancer, nothing at all to do with Ivermectin or Covid-19.

[eisfeld]

1 hour ago, zzaa09 said:

Or the steadfast and mind numbing induced establishment circles.

Of three years time, there's a tonne of evidence/material that completely contradicts the repeated conventional narratives regarding everything COVID. 

 

Too many obsessive apologists and loyalists insist on ignoring such things, preferring to take the Kool-Aid that was offered some time ago - and sticking with it. 

I think from all the posters you are the one with the most mind numbing amount of "it's all a conspiracy" posts. Not just here, not just on the topic of Covid but nearly every single one of your posts on any topic. Zero facts, zero sources and zero value. Had to call you out on it after reading that latest post.

[onthedarkside]

off topic unattributed statistics and image without context removed. This topic is not about deaths and their causes in Alberta or about cancer treatment with Mebendazole. Replies also removed

[Danderman123]

3 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

Or the steadfast and mind numbing induced establishment circles.

Of three years time, there's a tonne of evidence/material that completely contradicts the repeated conventional narratives regarding everything COVID. 

 

Too many obsessive apologists and loyalists insist on ignoring such things, preferring to take the Kool-Aid that was offered some time ago - and sticking with it. 

Links, please.

[Danderman123]

Concerning the allegation that Big Pharma opposes Ivermectin use for Covid because reasons, it is not unusual for clinical trials to demonstrate secondary uses for existing medications. One significant example is aspirin, which is widely prescribed for heart patients, after clinical trials demonstrated efficacy.

 

Yet the Ivermectin supporters claim this never happens.

[samuttodd]

Many compounds have multiple medical uses.

 

Some antipsychotics and antidepressants are used for insomnia,

 

Some amphetamines are used for narcolepsy and adhd.

 

Hell,  even liquor has been used as pain killer, antiseptic, engine cleaner, and fuel.

 

Similarly, ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine have uses for more than just their main use.

 

Edited February 27, 2023 by samuttodd

[xylophone]

1 hour ago, samuttodd said:

Similarly, ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine have uses for more than just their main use.

Didn't help this guy though................

 

Vladimir Zelenko, MD, an upstate New York doctor who gained notoriety during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic for his controversial treatment ideas, died last week in Dallas, Texas, at 48, according to an obituary in The New York Timesopens in a new tab or window.

 

Zelenko garnered national attention for claiming that hydroxychloroquine was an effective treatment for COVID-19 after former President Donald Trump championed his ideas in the early days of the pandemic, according to the Times.

[samuttodd]

Vlad died of lung cancer though.

[xylophone]

7 minutes ago, samuttodd said:

Vlad died of lung cancer though.

Similarly, ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine have uses for more than just their main use.

 

So I guess we can rule out hydroxychloroquine as an alternative treatment for cancer!!!!

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, samuttodd said:

 

 

Similarly, ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine have uses for more than just their main use.

 

Maybe, but they are useless for Covid.

[Danderman123]

Anyone using anecdotal evidence to support Ivermectin, just look at the Herman Cain awards on Reddit. There are entries for literally 1000s of anti-vaxxers, Ivermectin supporters, and Covid hoaxers on the Vent, or dead.

 

I guess there is nothing more hard core than a Covid hoaxer dead from Covid.

[FritsSikkink]

On 2/24/2023 at 6:50 PM, AustinRacing said:

Joint effort here means Oxford did 99.9% of the research using Mahidol equipment that were sitting there as Thai staff are unable to use them. The 0.1% contribution by Thais included ordering lunch and stamping parking tickets. 

Most people graduating from Mahidol are way smarter than the average poster here.

[eisfeld]

4 hours ago, samuttodd said:

Similarly, ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine have uses for more than just their main use.

Sure, don't think anyone is disputing that. They just have no use for preventing or treating Covid.

[onthedarkside]

A link to a non journal anonymous data base website of meta analysis studies on ivermectin has been removed:

 

The most widely touted evidence for the efficacy of ivermectin against COVID-19 are meta-analyses by advocacy groups touting ivermectin as a way out of the pandemic, such as the BIRD Group in the UK and the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCCA) in the US, that supposedly show, based on an aggregation of existing clinical trials of COVID-19, that ivermectin is highly effective as a preventative after exposure and as a treatment that prevents progression of mild disease to severe disease. Unfortunately, these meta-analyses are highly dependent on a small number of highly “positive” trials, which, if removed, turn positive meta-analyses into negative meta-analyses. Seemingly not coincidentally, these very highly “positive” clinical trials are also the most dodgy, either very badly done at best or outright fraudulent at worst.

 

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ivermectin-is-the-new-hydroxychloroquine-take-6-incompetence-and-fraud-everywhere/

 

 

[eisfeld]

39 minutes ago, samuttodd said:

 

Here is some information re: ivermectin and how it did when studied .

 

And here is an article explaining why this site can be extremely misleading and not trustworthy https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/09/the-anonymous-meta-analysis-thats-convincing-people-to-use-ivermectin/

And another one https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/ivermectin-hasnt-proven-effective-covid-19-so-far-despite-persistent-online-claims/

 

I looked at a few studies, saw that a study (e.g. Ravikirti) itself said the results were statistically insignificant but that site included it in their stats anyways.

 

The confidence intervals are off the charts. What's the point of aggregating a lot of bad studies and some of the entries seem to even state a completely different outcome on this website versus what the actual study says. They also include retracted studies! Plus they throw together studies with completely different methodologies.

 

Looks to me like a clear bad faith effort as they knowingly still show this wrong and misleading data. No wonder the authors want to stay anonymous in comparison to writing an actual meta study and publishing a paper. Go figure.

 

Edited February 27, 2023 by eisfeld

[onthedarkside]

Another off topic unsubstantiated claim has been removed by the same poster. Carry on and face a warning

[KhunLA]

Shh ... don't tell the people, or MSM,  The drug companies, they probably already know.

 

"Conclusions: 

Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally."

 

https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/08000/ivermectin_for_prevention_and_treatment_of.7.aspx

[ozimoron]

25 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Shh ... don't tell the people, or MSM,  The drug companies, they probably already know.

 

"Conclusions: 

Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally."

 

https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/08000/ivermectin_for_prevention_and_treatment_of.7.aspx

That was in 2021. The science has obviously moved on and shown ivermectin to not be useful.